Environmental Technology Council
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 521253715
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2015–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024
- Location
- Washington, DC, US
- Phone
- 202-783-0870
- Rating confidence
- Limited
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $758,830
- Expenses
- $673,180
- Assets
- $1,134,430
- Liabilities
- $10,178
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
6 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- James Williams (Executive Director)
Highest reported compensation
- James Williams (Executive Director): $252,823 total reported compensation
- Jeaneen Maxwell (General Counsel): $185,775 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To promote the protection of public health and the environment through the adoption of environmentally sound procedures and technologies for recycling and detoxifying industrial wastes and by-products and properly managing and disposing of wastes and waste residues; To promote the vital role of the hazardous and industrial waste services industry, as a key part of the national economy, that enables advances in progress in environmental protection; To foster and encourage an awareness of environmental concerns by all people who might be affected by the recycling, disposal, and treatment of industrial wastes; and To promote environmental policies that are balanced and consistent with sustainable economic development and responsible stewardship of our nation’s natural resources.
What it reported doing in 2024
Prepared technical comments, testified at public hearings, and participated in meetings withFederal government officials regarding numerous initiatives that affect ETC member companies, including U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) definition of solid waste and recyclingrequirements, Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) collection and disposal of controlledsubstances, Department of Homeland Security (DHS) chemical facility anti-terrorism standards, andFederal regulatory reform proposals.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 95% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Cannot be determined from the filing. The filing does not provide enough consistent spending detail to tell whether the nonprofit works directly or through others.
The verdict
- The available evidence is not sufficient to produce an overall rating for this filing. This is not a warning sign.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: NotEnoughData
- Transparency & Controls: 60
- Accountability: 48
- Sustainability: 56
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: Limited
- Program expense ratio: Limited
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 63rd percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: Limited
- Major donor itemization: Limited
- Related-party transparency: Limited
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 14th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 2 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 22
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Fail
- Whistleblower policy: Fail
- Document-retention policy: Fail
- CEO compensation review process: Fail
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Missing
- Independent financial-statement audit: Fail
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 11.3%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.69; rating input score 59; 59th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.01; rating input score 70; 70th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 65.2%; rating input score 1; 1st percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.3% per year; rating input score 100; 44th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.7% per year; rating input score 100; 41st percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.1% per year; rating input score 0; 17th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 1 operating location identified
- Where the money goes: Financial trends and filed revenue, expense, asset, and liability detail
- Governance: 4 of 6 board members independent · 2 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 3 filed program accomplishments
- Leadership: top reported pay $253K · 6 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Consistency: 12 of 12 current checks pass
- Schedules: 4 filed schedules · includes executive pay
- Filing history: 9 filing years from 2015 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- High — Accountability: Governance controls: 6 of 8 not reported.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Review — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 59/100.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 1/100.